Well worth a read – self damning words of alarmists

Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO), then representing the Clinton-Gore administration as U.S undersecretary of state for global issues, addressing the same Rio Climate Summit audience, agreed: “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Wirth now heads the U.N. Foundation which lobbies for hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to help underdeveloped countries fight climate change.)

Also speaking at the Rio conference, Deputy Assistant of State Richard Benedick, who then headed the policy divisions of the U.S. State Department said: “A global warming treaty [Kyoto] must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect.”

In 1988, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, told editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald: “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

I highly recommend this article, read it in full here, and bookmark it for future reference:

54 thoughts on “Well worth a read – self damning words of alarmists”

I’m a collector of alarmist quotes, so I also recommend the Forbes article. I like to string together a group of quotes that paint a sharp picture, that give the full argument, like showing the explicit advocacy of deception by nearly all the top warmist. Real Science did a post noting a recent alarmist prediction of doom, and my comment:
Scientists in the US [have presented the most dire picture of the disaster to come via climate change.] Oh, it’s the most dramatic yet, the biggest loudest Chicken Little example of shameless fear mongering yet… so that makes it true. No, they’ve been fear mongering for decades, and every prediction of doom that the warmist and ecoloon propagandists have made has failed to materialize. It never happens. Never. Every single prediction, going back decades, has fallen short, not one exception or two but no exceptions, none, every prediction has been completely off the mark. Not even close.
“[in twenty years {2008} ] the West Side Highway [and thus most of Manhattan] will be under water… ” -James Hansen, NASA, 1988
“[Inaction will cause]… by the turn of the century [2000], an ecological catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust.” -Mustafa Tolba, 1982, former Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Program
“Demographers agree almost unanimously .. by the year 2000, the entire world.. [with exceptions] will be in famine.” -Peter Gunter, Earth Day 1970
“Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” -Noel Brown, ex UNEP Director, 1989
“If present trends continue, the world will be .. eleven degrees colder by the year 2000… This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” -Kenneth E.F. Watt, Earth Day 1970
Please, no more!

Readers of this site will be familiar with most of the content, but this is a must-read. It is one of the most powerful and comprehensive exposures of the great climate deception that I have ever read.

I’ll try to read the full article but just a comment on the statement from the former Canadian Minister of the Environment that “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
As a science layperson but as a full time taxpayer and stakeholder, my opinion (vote) is once the science of extreme and catastrophic consequences of “global warming” is confirmed, then I and millions of others can have the discussion of how to adapt and deal with those consequences, incuding bringing about justice and equality. My opinion re the science is not worth anything but my opinion re the costs and impact most definitely is and politicians and vested interests would do well to remember that. Revolution has many faces.

Truly excellent article; the bits I liked best were:
As Greenpeace co-founder Peter Moore observed on Fox Business News in January 2011: “We do not have any scientific proof that we are the cause of the global warming that has occurred in the last 200 years…The alarmism is driving us through scare tactics to adopt energy policies that are going to create a huge amount of energy poverty among the poor people. It’s not good for people and it’s not good for the environment…In a warmer world we can produce more food.”
When Moore was asked who is responsible for promoting unwarranted climate fear and what their motives are, he said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.”
So is alarmism a cult, or a scam, or both?

While I’m at it, if I could, let me add just one more comment, because ecoloon quotes are my bread and butter. A Real Science post on Joe Biden gave me the opportunity to add this: Some things we’d think Biden would have said, but…, amazingly, someone else did:
“A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.” -Richard Benedik, U.N. / U.S. Bureaucrat
“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” -Paul Watson, Co-Founder of Greenpeace
“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations [for reducing CO2] upon the data. We’re basing them upon the climate models.” -Chris Folland, UK Meteorological Office
“Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful [propaganda].” -David Frame, Oxford U
“The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.” -Daniel Botkin, ex Chair of Environmental Studies, UCSB
“Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.” -Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC
“The collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans.” -Dr. Reed F. Noss, The Wildlands Project
“Free Enterprise really means [giving the rich] the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings…Capitalism is destroying the earth.” -Helen Caldicott, Union of Concerned Scientists
“Everything we have developed over the last 100 years should be destroyed.” -Pentti Linkola, Finnish Ecologist

Guardian – 13 December 2009
Full text of Tony Blair’s speech in Copenhagen
“Let me restate the reason for this negotiation, since in recent weeks there has been a concerted fight back against the notion that such a negotiation is even necessary. It is said that the science around climate change is not as certain as its proponents allege.
It doesn’t need to be…………….
Therefore, even purely as a matter of precaution, given the seriousness of the consequences if such a view is correct, and the time it will take for action to take effect, we should act………”http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/13/copenhagen-tony-blair-speech-transcript

Many of these quotes have been posted here in WUWT previously, but this Forbes article gives a good opportunity to re- post them:
______________
”My three goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with its full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”
David Foreman,
co-founder of Earth First!
”A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
Ted Turner,
Founder of CNN and major UN donor
”The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.”
Jeremy Rifkin,
Greenhouse Crisis Foundation
”Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
Paul Ehrlich,
Professor of Population Studies,
Author: “Population Bomb”, “Ecoscience”
”The big threat to the planet is people: there are too many, doing too well economically and burning too much oil.”
Sir James Lovelock,
BBC Interview
”We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
Lead author of many IPCC reports
”Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.”
Sir John Houghton,
First chairman of the IPCC
”It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
Paul Watson,
Co-founder of Greenpeace
”Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
David Brower,
First Executive Director of the Sierra Club
”We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”
Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation
”No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment
”The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.”
Emeritus Professor Daniel Botkin
”Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Maurice Strong,
Founder of the UN Environmental Program
”A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-Development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.”
Paul Ehrlich,
Professor of Population Studies,
Author: “Population Bomb”, “Ecoscience”
”If I were reincarnated I would wish to return to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh,
husband of Queen Elizabeth II,
Patron of the Patron of the World Wildlife Foundation
”The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization we have in the US. We have to stop these third World countries right where they are.”
Michael Oppenheimer
Environmental Defense Fund
”Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.”
Professor Maurice King
”Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.”
Maurice Strong,
Rio Earth Summit
”Complex technology of any sort is an assault on the human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.”
Amory Lovins,
Rocky Mountain Institute
”I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. it played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”
John Davis,
Editor of Earth First! Journal
“…the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.” ~ David Rockefeller, June, 1991, Bilderberg Conference, Baden, Germany link
Thursday, 18 November 2010 13:16
Neue Zürcher Zeitung
Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.
[Thank you to No Tricks Zone for listing this link.]
“PSU expert” Peter Buckland says “[Penn State is] arguably the most powerful institution in the state of Pennsylvania, maybe more powerful than the state government, because it can just tell the state government to go away all the time. When you have a university that powerful, the statement that you know like …climate change is real, we have people that tell us that it is real, and we have to take meaningful action, that pushes other institutions to do things. And it will push the political conversation some. If you have coalitions of every major research university in the country, saying that and broadcasting it very clearly and then embedding it in everything they do, it will change the civil-, it will change the society.”http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/07/april-2012-remarkable-statement-by-penn.html
**********************************
Here are a few more quotations, excerpted fromhttp://www.green-agenda.com
Now seriously, do you really think this is all about global warming?
Is it not possible that CAGW alarmism is just a smokescreen?
It must be obvious by now, even to the most stupid of warmists, that the world is no longer warming, and has not been warming for 10-15 years..
And the warmists are not all stupid, so what are they up to?
In their own words:
__________
“Complex technology of any sort is an assault on
human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to
discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy,
because of what we might do with it.”
– Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute
“The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the
worst thing that could happen to the planet.”
– Jeremy Rifkin,
Greenhouse Crisis Foundation
“Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the
equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
– Prof Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University
“The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another
United States. We can’t let other countries have the same
number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US.
We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.”
-Michael Oppenheimer,
Environmental Defense Fund
“Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty,
reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.”
-Professor Maurice King
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.”
– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world.”
– Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment
“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations
on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
– Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
“The models are convenient fictions
that provide something very useful.”
– Dr David Frame,
climate modeler, Oxford University
“I believe it is appropriate to have an ‘over-representation’ of the facts
on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience.”
-Al Gore,
Climate Change activist
“It doesn’t matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true.”
– Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace
“The only way to get our society to truly change is to
frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.”
– emeritus professor Daniel Botkin
“The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and
spiritual challenge to all of humanity. It is also our greatest
opportunity to lift Global Consciousness to a higher level.”
-Al Gore,
Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech
“We are on the verge of a global transformation.
All we need is the right major crisis…”
– David Rockefeller,
Club of Rome executive member
“We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place
for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and
plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams,
free shackled rivers and return to wilderness
millions of acres of presently settled land.”
– David Foreman,
co-founder of Earth First!

When Moore was asked who is responsible for promoting unwarranted climate fear and what their motives are, he said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.”

If you deem and I do, that man made global warming was a fiction, a scam and a political fabrication from the outset.
An excuse, designed to provide and on the pretext of saving mother Gaia [see James Lovelock], for dumping coal and nuclear power generation and as a vehicle for the re-allocation of a vast financial transfer from ‘West to South’ – Western taxpayers to the ‘poor’. Then, this Forbes article tells you all you need to know – it is of little surprise to me.

For once, I’m going to defend Tony Blair
He is saying that even if certainty is only 80% compared to 95% (or whatever the real numbers are) we should still act. That is a perfectly defensible position even though you or I may disagree.

I don’t think Larry Bell’s title fits the quotes. No quote is debunking the science, they are merely showing some people having other motives but scientific ones to implement the same policy.
So some political backgrounds make it easier to accept some form of regulations and implicitely that might lower the bar for the burden of proof.
That’s what the quotes show: AGW makes them do things they wantend to do anyway. Therefore making them more likely to accept the theory.
That’s why nuclear is no favorit, it’s not something environmentalists wantend to do anyway.
Obviously this works both ways.
Libertarians and conservatives need more proof for AGW.
Therefore there is a correlation between political ideology and attitude towards AGW.
Hardly anything new.
That should not be confused with accepting or rejecting AGW ONLY for political reasons. (maybe some do, but one can’t generalise)
And it definitely shouldn’t be confused with “debunking the science”.
By the way, in an internet test I score between somewhere between Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi politically, but I consider myself a lukewarmer.
So exceptions are possible.

Then there’s the assertion in the November, 1980, issue of Fusion magazine (page 52): “When U.S. Environmental Protection Agency chief William Ruckelshaus was about to announce his decision to ban DDT in June 1972, he confided to a friend, ‘There is no scientific basis for banning this chemical — this is a political decision.’ ”
The sustained defaming of critics, the refusing to share data/analyses, and the new-speak torturing of the meaning of “science” surrounding the decision to ban the use of DDT has been repeated regarding “global warming.” Our betters are always looking for ways to control us, for our own good, of course.

Reminds me very much of what one anti-smoking Dr said in the House of Lords when being questioned about the supposed dangers of second hand smoke – “So what if it’s bad science. It’s in a good cause.” There are many, many parallels I’ve noticed between the health alarmists and the warmists.

AndyL says:
February 6, 2013 at 4:24 am
‘For once, I’m going to defend Tony Blair
He is saying that even if certainty is only 80% compared to 95% (or whatever the real numbers are) we should still act. That is a perfectly defensible position even though you or I may disagree.”
Well then you shouldn’t get in your car to drive to work since this places you at risk. The fact that you will soon be impoverished is an unintended consequence, of course.

It is difficult to regard what they say as “damning” when you consider that their objective was thoroughly Satanic to begin with: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse?” 1990, Maurice Strong – UN’s first environmental chief.

That “former Canadian Environment Minister” washttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Stewart
(IMO, typical canadian (lower case ‘c’) liberal (lower case ‘l’) from ontario)
There are two well known quotes attributed to her, during the kyoto debacle, BOTH were 1998, not 1988 (I realize Forbes got the date wrong and even merged the two quotes).
“No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits”
and
“Climate change (provides) the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world”
I remember this woman well. I was in direct opposition to her ignorance, her party, her belief system, and pretty much everything about her. Her degree is in nursing, which apparently qualifies her to be an environmental expert and push to commit an entire country to a near-suicidal pact that wasted much money and accomplished nothing. Way to go, liberals. Way to go.
In the end, the idiot prime minister “Jean Chretien” simply ignored what everyone else was telling him and signed Canada up to Kyoto. Apparently he thought it had something to do with cleaning up smokestack emissions from US factories and would bring more trucks over the border (I’m not even being sarcastic!). I suppose by liberal party standards he was brilliant, his IQ was way, way higher than 40. Maybe as high as 50.
Last election the liberal party was completely and totally decimated. For those who don’t follow Canadian politics, they are currently fighting to see who will lead the carcass of the party, since Canada is being run better now by the Conservatives than it has been in many decades. The candidate getting the most headlines is Justin Beiber Trudeau, the son of one of the most destructive and toxic leaders the free world ever saw, Pierre Trudeau.

AndyL says:
February 6, 2013 at 4:24 amFor once, I’m going to defend Tony Blair
He is saying that even if certainty is only 80% compared to 95% (or whatever the real numbers are) we should still act. That is a perfectly defensible position even though you or I may disagree.
Not only is it not defensible, it is idiotic to base energy policy on the Precautionary Principle. Besides, the chance that CAGW is true is precisely 0%.

@ Eric Simpson“Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” -Noel Brown, ex UNEP Director, 1989
Perhaps this is not one to include as it could be interpreted as:
“Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth [in a century or so] by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” -Noel Brown, ex UNEP Director, 1989

Elizabeth says:
February 6, 2013 at 3:59 am
“This article should be posted up on all church doors like Luthers edict . should be distributed to politicians etc everywhere.”
I have sent the info to 4 Canadian Members of Parliament, and 1 Senator.
[along with Luther Wu’s list]

I’ve posted this before. It’s pertinent again:
The Man-Made Global Warming scam becomes evident when one looks at the narrative that spews from the alarmists: Only evil and suffering can come from a warmer Earth. Fossil fueled, Western style prosperity must stop. This is the real agenda. Saving the Earth has little to do with it. Even if all the “CO2 causes warming” theory were true, It still does not absolutely dictate doom.
I say, why can’t it be? : “Congratulations children, The Energy sources that fuel our economies and our prosperity, give us long life and comfort, these fossil fuels will also cause our planet to warm gently, about 2C degrees over the next century. What luck!
With the warmth and extra CO2 for plant life, millions of acres of tundra will become forests. Millions of acres of frozen steppe will become arable. Starvation will end. Prosperity will reach even the poorest people. We must keep searching for and burning oil and coal so we can improve our climate and prosper. Humanity will become wealthy. With this wealth we can preserve habitat for animals, protect the rain forest. We will clean the oceans and the land. Our future is bright. We are entering the age of abundance. “
The Earth is not warming of late though. Too bad.

@bob
Something strange happened with PostModernism in that it deconstructed all values and meanings to thoroughly, that it left an empty flat nihilistic view. With that background nihilism, a lot of ideas in the environmental movement become “appealing” – we are just one species, of no importance, and we are only a small part of the biosphere, the biosphere is the “whole” and it takes priority. It is called a “flatland” view because it ignores the depths inside human culture. As the article says, only humans have a consciousness that seem able to care enough to wonder about a healthier environment, whilst a lion is only interested in lunch. But the nihilism is pretty widespread now. But how to fix that? It seems people are trying.
Howard Bloom’s book “The Genius of the Beast” seems to look into our own biology, our own DNA, for the creative driving passion which eventually became Capitalism (The Beast) and which in its healthy forms, continues to lift human consciousness to new levels.

@techgm et al; DDT still (2013) hasn’t been shown to be harmful but DDE, it’s main degradation product, MAY be. At the time of Ruckelshaus’ decision to ban DDT, it had been off patent for years, no one was making a profit on it, and newer, on patent, pesticides like Malathion, Parathion, and the like were being sold w/ huge margins. No matter that millions in third world (at the time) countries would die of malaria et al.
At the time we had ecoloons like Carson and the Ehrlichs screaming doom and gloom and politiciansk, like Ruckelshaus, do what politicians do “best”, they make political decisions. These political decisions are overwhelmingly harmful because they are backed by the “feelings” of the voters and greed of the politicians and their hangers on, not evidence.
Follow the money. Nothing has changed.

Sparks says:
February 6, 2013 at 7:36 am
Is there such a thing as a reverse genius? basically they are saying; to increase prosperity and equal opportunity, we need to reduce prosperity and equal opportunity.
In the UK, there is a substantial body of opinion which states that the way to reduce our current level of debt is to borrow more money so, even if it isn’t called reverse genius, there’s a lot of it about.
FZ got it about right I think.
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
He also said “There is no hell. There is only France”, but I digress.

@Mr Green Genes – Re: “In the UK, there is a substantial body of opinion which states that the way to reduce our current level of debt is to borrow more money”
The same philosophy is prevalent in the US as well.

James Lovelock [Gaia theory] – 2010
“The great climate science centres around the world are more than well aware how weak their science is. If you talk to them privately they’re scared stiff of the fact that they don’t really know what the clouds and the aerosols are doing. They could be absolutely running the show. We haven’t got the physics worked out yet. One of the chiefs once said to me that he agreed that they should include the biology in their models, but he said they hadn’t got the physics right yet and it would be five years before they do. ”http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock

Something he wished we did not see. Is Phil Jones now worried?

Dr. Phil Jones – CRU – 7th May, 2009
‘Bottom line: the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’
CRU emails

I just watched as much Henry Waxman as I could stomach on C-span, referenced by James Ard at 6:25 pacific time. James, your comment was very well presented. Nice job. If there is among elected officials in Washington a truly subversive presence, it is Henry Waxman.
theduke.

A perfect complement to this piece by Larry Bell is Eisenhower’s much-quoted and prophetic farewell address to the nation in 1960. The political left has always focused on the section referring to the military-industrial complex, but there is the far more relevant section on the scientific/technological elite which he claims is “Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture. . . ” I know it’s been quoted ad nauseam, but it always astonishes me how prescient that speech was. He understood the dangers of a marriage of convenience between government and the /scientific/techno-elites inside and outside the universities. We are seeing the horrible offspring of that marriage today. They are bleeding us dry and planning on submerging our liberties in flood of prohibitions, regulations, and directives.http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/dwightdeisenhowerfarewell.html

“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.”
Mr. President, I will consider reducing my CO2 footprint when you make a little log cabin in the woods your official residence instead of the White House and start getting around with a horse and buggy instead of a big, gas-guzzling limo and Air Force One. Lead by example, Mr. President. Until then, spare me your hypocrisy.

Mr Lynn says:
February 6, 2013 at 7:27 am
Rick K says:
February 6, 2013 at 5:41 am
Perhaps a WUWT “Reference Page” collecting and sourcing these and similar quotes would be in order…
Not to make more work for our host, but this is an excellent idea! This thread could be a starting point.
/Mr Lynn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The quotes are being gathered here so a prominent link would be a better idea.
(Maybe have a way to send C3 headlines new ones)

Rather than asking “how do we solve climate change?” we need to turn the question around and ask: “how does the idea of climate change alter the way we arrive at and achieve our personal aspirations.…?

For permission, contact us. See the About>Contact menu under the header.

All rights reserved worldwide.

Some material from contributors may contain additional copyrights of their respective company or organization.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on WUWT. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it. This notice is required by recently enacted EU GDPR rules, and since WUWT is a globally read website, we need to keep the bureaucrats off our case!
Cookie Policy